ArticlePloS one2025
Association of ultrasound-assisted combined with conventional anatomical landmark paramedian spinal anesthesia and its impact on first pass success rate in patients with lower limb fractures- A retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe association between ultrasound-assisted combined with conventional anatomical landmark paramedian spinal anesthesia regarding the first-pass success rate remains contentious. This study aims to clarify this relationship.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort analysis of 146 patients with lower limb fractures, patients were divided into two groups based on their spinal anesthesia technique:ultrasound-assisted combined with conventional anatomical landmark (median or paramedian). The primary endpoint was the first-pass success rate, while secondary endpoints included total procedure time and discomfort score. Recorded covariates encompassed sex, age, BMI, ASA class, preoperative preparation time, pre-injury physical activity, number of needle insertions, pain intensity (VAS), satisfaction score, puncture-related pain, and postoperative low back pain. Outcomes were evaluated via logistic regression.
resultsAfter adjusting for potential confounders, the ultrasound-assisted paramedian approach demonstrated a significantly higher first-pass success rate (OR = 6.11, 95% CI 2.09-17.86, P = 0.001). Secondary benefits included reduced procedure duration and improved patient comfort. Sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching confirmed the robustness of the results (E-value = 4.379), indicating minimal influence from unmeasured confounders.
conclusionsIn patients with lower limb fractures, ultrasound-assisted paramedian spinal anesthesia using anatomical landmarks increased first-pass success rates, reduced procedural time, and improved patient comfort compared to the median approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.